Filed under: Videos
Jay Leno has a 1967 Plymouth Barracuda upgraded and enhanced by Hurst down to the Garage to appear alongside his modern Hurst edition Dodge Challenger.Continue reading 1967 Hurst Barracuda goes for gold in Jay Leno's Garage
1967 Hurst Barracuda goes for gold in Jay Leno's Garage originally appeared on Autoblog on Mon, 13 Jul 2015 12:44:00 EST. Please see our terms for use of feeds.
Permalink | Email this | Comments
Chrome: Shopping for clothes online is convenient, but one drawback is you’re not sure how the item will look until you buy it and it’s delivered. Try.com is a free service that aims to fix that inconvenience.
Photography is part skill, part timing, and a great deal of luck, as the photographer of this incredible scene from nature knows first hand, having captured an stunning series of images showing a crow riding an eagle.
Poo Chan has a great deal of wildlife photography experience, but he would never have guessed that these two birds – both with strong personalities and not known for normal interactions – might align in flight for such a strange moment. And if you like this photo, be sure to check the link above – he is amazing at capturing animals in motion, even aside from this once-in-a-lifetime set of shots.
From the photographer: “Crows are known for aggressively harassing other raptors that are much bigger in size when spotted in their territories and usually these ‘intruders’ simply retreat without much fuss. However, in this frame the crow did not seem to harass the bald eagle at such close proximity and neither did the bald eagle seem to mind the crow’s presence invading its personal space. What made it even more bizarre was that the crow even made a brief stop on the back of the eagle as if it was taking a free scenic ride and the eagle simply obliged.”
Writing in the Washington Post, Stacey Patton and Douglas J. Leonard argue not simply that comedian Amy Schumer is a racist but that the Comedy Central star's off-color brand of humor is connected to the climate that produced Dylann Roof, the white supremacist who slaughtered churchgoing blacks in South Carolina. In one of her stand-up routines, the authors explain, Schumer says
“Nothing works 100 percent of the time, except Mexicans.” In another bit, she blithely told an audience that Latino men are rapists. “I used to date Hispanic guys, but now I prefer consensual.”
She has also called Latina women "crazy." Patton and Leonard say this isn't really any different than Donald Trump suggesting that the majority of illegal immigrants from Mexico are rapists. What's more, the authors assert that
America’s soil of racism is fed by jokes and incendiary speeches, by stereotypical images and symbols like the Confederate flag. Just as Rush Limbaugh, Donald Trump and other members of the Republican Party regularly disparage people of color and claim they are simply telling the truth, Schumer can use comedy as a protective shroud to deny the harm and hurt caused by her jokes. A joke is considered benign especially when told by a supposed white liberal feminist. We can distance ourselves from the anger, from the harm, from the ideology, and from the hatred of the “extreme,” but also find comfort in the same anger, ideology and hatred that is “just a joke.”
This rhetoric isn’t just ugly. It contributes to a worldview that justifies a broken immigration system, mass incarceration, divestment from inner city communities, that rationalizes inequality and buttresses persistent segregation and violence. Yet nobody wants to take responsibility for spewing rhetoric that breeds the fear that results in soaring gun purchases, that “inspires” monsters like Dylann Roof to craft a manifesto with deadly consequences.
The ability to connect obviously distinct people (nightclub comics, low-I.Q. ramblings by America's favorite idiot moneybags, and deranged psychopaths who go on murder sprees) is either a sign of Sherlock Holmes-level genius or something close to insanity, a JFK conspiracy theory applied to everyday life. In this instance, I'm leaning toward the latter, especially given the massive hops, skips, and jumps Patton and Leonard must do to go from Schumer's standup to Roof's murderous rampage. Especially important here might be the actual manifesto apparently authored by Roof, which among other things complains incessantly about the fact that American culture no longer makes a place for organized and lone racists. Indeed, as Jesse Walker pointed out recently, even the Southern Poverty Law Center, whose bread and butter is ginning up panic over an ever-rising tide of hate groups, acknowledges that extremism is on the decline. Beyond that—and this is no small matter—Roof simply isn't representative of main currents in American thought.
I agree with Patton and Leonard that Rush Limbaugh's and Donald Trump's rhetoric is ugly and incendiary, especially regarding immigrants. There's a large number of other public figures, including idiots like Rep. Steve King of Iowa, who are similarly messed up on that score. It's far from clear, however, exactly what role any of these people (even King, a longtime congressman) has on violence against Mexicans or anyone else in America, especially since violent crime is way down even as harsh rhetoric is up. More to the point, roping in Amy Schumer stretches credulity way past the breaking point. The gesture would be funny if it didn't so perfectly illustrate the overboard attacks on all sorts of free expression.
In a resounding victory last month for economic liberty, the Texas Supreme Court struck down a state licensing law that required eyebrow threaders to complete 750 hours of costly and unnecessary cosmetology training in order to receive the state's permission to charge customers for the harmless act of removing unwanted eyebrow hairs with a loop of cotton thread.
"The requirement of 750 hours of training to become licensed is not just unreasonable or harsh," the Texas Supreme Court held in Patel v. Texas Department of Licensing and Regulation, it is "so burdensome as to be oppressive."
No kidding. As the Texas high court pointed out, "persons licensed to apply eyelash extensions—a specialty involving the use of chemicals and a high rate of adverse reactions—are required to undergo only 320 hours of training." Eyebrow threading, by contrast, is an entirely safe occupation that involves no chemicals and requires only that practitioners follow the most rudimentary of sanitary practices, such as the regular washing of hands. To force would-be eyebrow threaders to spend as much as $9,000 on 750 hours of pointless training in order to obtain a pointless license is practically the definition of arbitrary government. We're not talking unlicensed brain surgery here.
In addition to that welcome judgment by the court's majority, Texas Supreme Court Justice Don Willett filed a lengthy concurring opinion of his own, in which he launched a full-throated defense of economic liberty under both the Texas and U.S. Constitutions. It is easily one of the most libertarian legal decision's I've ever read. (I'm also happy to report that Justice Willett cites my book in it.) Here's an excerpt from Justice Willett's superb concurrence:
This case concerns the timeless struggle between personal freedom and government power. Do Texans live under a presumption of liberty or a presumption of restraint? The Texas Constitution confers power—but even more critically, it constrains power. What are the outer-boundary limits on government actions that trample Texans' constitutional right to earn an honest living for themselves and their families? Some observers liken judges to baseball umpires, calling legal balls and strikes, but when it comes to restrictive licensing laws, just how generous is the constitutional strike zone? Must courts rubber-stamp even the most nonsensical encroachments on occupational freedom? Are the most patently farcical and protectionist restrictions nigh unchallengeable, or are there, in fact, judicially enforceable limits?
This case raises constitutional eyebrows because it asks building-block questions about constitutional architecture—about how we as Texans govern ourselves and about the relationship of the citizen to the State. This case concerns far more than whether Ashish Patel can pluck unwanted hair with a strand of thread. This case is fundamentally about the American Dream and the unalienable human right to pursue happiness without curtsying to government on bended knee. It is about whether government can connive with rent-seeking factions to ration liberty unrestrained, and whether judges must submissively uphold even the most risible encroachments.
The Texas Supreme Court's opinion in Patel v. Texas Department of Licensing and Regulation is available here. Justice Willett's concurring opinion in Patel is available here.
Author's note: Jacob Sullum blogged this story first yesterday. To read his writeup, go here.
Via IJ Review (and the Twitter feed of G60TimbersFan) comes this true tale of petty tyranny in the Great Lakes State:
Her name is Becky Rehr. She may look like a mild-mannered, upstanding citizen. But in the eyes of the law enforcers in the State of Michigan, she is a fugitive outlaw who had to be brought to justice.
Her hideous crime? Not renewing a $10 dog license....
Rehr’s license for her 11-year-old border collie/ springer mix Dexter was set to expire on May 28th. Disastrously for the Michigan mother, she missed the deadline.
Her lax payment must have driven the bureaucrats at the county clerk’s office apoplectic, for when she appeared with proof of licensing – dated 26 days late – she wasn’t treated with a handshake and a smile. She was led out to be fingerprinted, get her mugshot taken, and be thrown in the county slammer.
Rehr spent three hours in jail and released on a $100 bond. She'll appear in court next week, where she faces up to $100 in fines and 90 days in the slammer.
Because. A. Dog. License. Expired.
Which brings me to this:
Here's a story from MLive.com:
A 15-year-old secondary school pupil corrected a mistake “which had been there for a very long time” in an equation at Boston’s venerable Museum of Science.
In 2009 I founded a company (of one, me) called Exleorix which focuses on how businesses (and others) can use social media effectively. It warms my heart to see this story.
Believe it or not we are just getting started with social media. There are many areas where it will grow further. Virtual reality plus social media is right around the corner.
The idea that social media can be used to cut through red tape is exactly the kind of idea which inspired me 6 years ago. We wish Jun the best of luck and hope that other towns will develop similar programs to cut bureaucracy. It’s still very early days, but we should be able to shrink government dramatically with current and future technologies.
All I can say is that the most sane states seem also to have the most libertarians.
Map created by Reason.com
"WE'RE GONNA KILL THE SWEDE"
By Raymond Benson
The Criterion Collection gave us the DVD versions of these two excellent crime thrillers twelve years ago. The company has now seen fit to upgrade the release to Blu-ray.
Based loosely on a short story by Ernest Hemingway, both versions of The Killers begin with the author's premise and then take off from there in very different directions. It's interesting to see how the respective screenwriters adapted the story and then created two disparate feature-length tales out of it. In Hemingway's piece, two hit men arrive in a small town looking for "The Swede". They terrorize the owner, cook, and a customer in a diner in an attempt to find the guy. After the killers leave in frustration, the customer runs to the Swede's boarding house and finds him in bed with his clothes on. He warns the Swede about the men, but the Swede says he's not going to do anything about it. The customer goes back to the diner and, after realizing no one cares, leaves town. And that’s it.
The 1946 version faithfully captures the short story even down to the dialogue for the first ten minutes. Where the short story ends, the movie goes on and we see the hit men actually kill the Swede (played by Burt Lancaster in his first starring role). Enter Jim Reardon (Edmond O'Brien, with third billing, but he's really the protagonist of the film!) as an insurance inspector. It turns out the Swede had a life insurance policy that benefits an old lady who helped him once. Reardon is determined to uncover the story behind it all, and the rest of the movie follows his investigation into the Swede's life in crime (told entirely in flashbacks). The Swede was a boxer who got mixed up with Big Jim, a racketeer (played by Albert Dekker), and falls in love with Big Jim's gal, Kitty (played by smoking hot Ava Gardner, in one of her first starring roles; Gardner had been kicking around Hollywood since the early 40s and this was her big break). As we all know, it's not good to mess around with the crime boss's dame.
Robert Siodmak received an Oscar nomination for Best Director on the picture (it was also nominated for adapted screenplay, editing, and music score). There's no question that The Killers is a seminal film noir, one of the best of the bunch produced when Hollywood was churning out these types of gritty crime pictures by the dozens. Siodmak's hand is assured as he brings in all the trademark film noir elements: ”expressionistic lighting, a femme fatale, stark brutality, a cynical attitude, flashbacks, a man haunted by the past, and more. The picture could serve as a Film Noir 101 course. Lancaster is fine and Gardner is sexy and dangerous, but it is O'Brien who holds the movie together.
The 1964 version is a different animal. It was produced to be the very first TV movie, but NBC viewed the finished product and deemed it too violent for television. Instead, the producers released it theatrically worldwide. Directed by Don Siegel (billed as "Donald Siegel"), The Killers Mach II stars Lee Marvin and Clu Gulager as the hitmen, who here become the focal point of the new story. John Cassavetes plays the Swede character, only here he is a racecar driver named Johnny. The femme fatale, Sheila, is played by Angie Dickinson, and get this... the crime boss is none other than Ronald Reagan in his last film role before he became a politician.
The film begins basically the same way, but the setting is different. The two hitmen come looking for Johnny and they kill him. Marvin's hitman character then takes over the dramatic action originally performed by O'Brien in the 1946 version. Marvin is the one who wants to find out why he and his partner were hired to kill Johnny, as well as what happened to a load of stolen cash that Johnny may have hidden.
While not as important or engaging as the 1946 edition, The Killers Mach II is worth watching for Siegel's solid craftsmanship. NBC was probably right not to broadcast the picture on television in 1964, given the time period, the movie is pretty brutal. Marvin and Gulager are creepy bad guys, Cassavetes delivers his usual fine work, and Dickinson displays her charms with aplomb. As for Reaga, well, le's just say it's not too difficult to buy him as a crook. In hindsight, given that this guy became a two-term U.S. president, his performance lends a "must-see" element to the picture.
Criterion gives us new high-definition digital restorations of both films (the 1964 version is in color and in 4:3 aspect ratio, since it was shot for television). They look terrific. The black and white contrasts in the 1946 version are especially sharp and unsettlingly beautiful. Almost all of the original supplements are here:Andrei Tarkovsky's student film adaptation of the short story from 1956; a video interview with noir expert/writer, the late Stuart M. Kaminsky; a video interview with Clu Gulager; Stacy Keach reading Hemingway's short story on audio; the Screen Directors Playhouse radio adaptation from 1949 featuring Lancaster and Shelley Winters; an audio excerpt from director Don Siegel's autobiography read by Hampton Fancher; and trailers. The booklets feature essays by novelist Jonathan Lethem and critic Geoffrey O'Brien. Not sure why Criterion left off the production, publicity, and behind-the-scenes stills, actor biographies, production correspondence, Paul Schrader's essay, and music and effects tracks, all which were on the original DVD release. If those things are important to you, then you may want to hold on to it.
But for the Blu-ray restorations alone, The Killers double feature is an excellent buy, especially for fans of film noir and crime pictures in general.
CLICK HERE TO ORDER FROM AMAZON
A day spent inside Patrón's Hacienda distillery, where both the brand's tequila and its luxury ethos are made.
...The DC government has spent hundreds of millions of dollars over the last decade trying to erect a streetcar line in the up-and-coming neighborhood of H Street. The project has been an epic disaster, perfectly demonstrating how ill-suited streetcars are to modern urban life.
Watch above or click on the link below for video, full text, supporting links, downloadable versions, and more Reason TV clips.
